What's your take: vinyl vs CD - Think Atheist2015-03-31T19:08:30Zhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/forum/topics/what-s-your-take-vinyl-vs-cd?feed=yes&xn_auth=noSampling theorem is very inte…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-12:1982180:Comment:13090402013-05-12T19:49:53.056Z_Robert_http://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/RobertCampbell
<p>Sampling theorem is very interesting and more complicated than one may believe. Sampling an analog signal is theoretically the same as multiplying (aka modulating) that signal with a finite series of equally spaced impulses. The result in the frequency domain is a convolution of the two spectra. It's a periodic hold and compare function that results in a squared-up signal. Any frequencies in the input signal (intentional or not) that are greater than half the sample rate will cause aliasing…</p>
<p>Sampling theorem is very interesting and more complicated than one may believe. Sampling an analog signal is theoretically the same as multiplying (aka modulating) that signal with a finite series of equally spaced impulses. The result in the frequency domain is a convolution of the two spectra. It's a periodic hold and compare function that results in a squared-up signal. Any frequencies in the input signal (intentional or not) that are greater than half the sample rate will cause aliasing (think of a wagon wheel in movie films) and distortion in the result. Therefore the signal is usually filtered before sampling, unless it is oversampled to such a degree that all noise will not be an issue. This is sometimes done using sigma delta "over-sample" system (captures delta vs absolute samples) to limit the resulting data you must to deal with. Of course there are so many ways to mess up this process. Imagine if I sample a signal at 47.9KHz and play it back at 48.1 KHz? You also have to filter the converted analog signal to suppress the "squared up" nature or once again over-sample it to use a cheaper filter. Fortunately, audio is slow: practically DC for most intents and purposes, so many of these problems simply go unnoticed...of course with a sigma delta input and class-d amplifier output you may never really go back to analog until you get to the air..</p> Just my POV.
In response to y…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-12:1982180:Comment:13087762013-05-12T14:55:45.422ZGregg R Thomashttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/GreggRThomas
<p>Just my POV.</p>
<p>In response to your post;</p>
<h1>"What's your take: vinyl vs CD"</h1>
<p>Personally my ears are so shot, it doesn't matter. :D</p>
<p>Just my POV.</p>
<p>In response to your post;</p>
<h1>"What's your take: vinyl vs CD"</h1>
<p>Personally my ears are so shot, it doesn't matter. :D</p> What you are describing is a…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-12:1982180:Comment:13088282013-05-12T13:02:34.523ZUnseenhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/Unseen
<p>What you are describing is a technological superstition.</p>
<p>The digital image is converted to analog for play. </p>
<p>Even if it weren't, the "points" (as you incorrectly call them) are dense enough that we don't hear points, just like when we see something, we don't see an array of colored dots representing the firing of visual nerve endings. </p>
<p>A dense enough presentation of perceptions becomes indistinguishable from "analog" reality. Consider Apple's Retina…</p>
<p>What you are describing is a technological superstition.</p>
<p>The digital image is converted to analog for play. </p>
<p>Even if it weren't, the "points" (as you incorrectly call them) are dense enough that we don't hear points, just like when we see something, we don't see an array of colored dots representing the firing of visual nerve endings. </p>
<p>A dense enough presentation of perceptions becomes indistinguishable from "analog" reality. Consider Apple's Retina Display.</p>
<p>Perception is really neither analog nor digital but something else entirely. However, it is more like digital than analog. Why? Because reality itself isn't analog. Magnified enough, every surface becomes rough, consisting of indivual entities not a continuous unbroken surface. Magnified enough, the smoothest glass becomes a matrix of molecules and atoms. Hell, light itself is constructed of parts call photons.</p>
<p>Finally, where are the double blind tests showing that people who think they are connoisseurs can even tell a digital recording from an analog one. And what about the fact that most so-called "analog" recordings are digitized at some stage in the production process then converted back to analog.</p> Violin is one of my favorite…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-12:1982180:Comment:13085642013-05-12T05:27:27.162Zangela kozmahttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/angelakozma
<p>Violin is one of my favorite instruments to hear played live. Gypsy violin can evoke emotions in a way to make you dance or cry. </p>
<p>Violin is one of my favorite instruments to hear played live. Gypsy violin can evoke emotions in a way to make you dance or cry. </p> Oh, I do so agree Heather.
Mo…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-12:1982180:Comment:13087242013-05-12T03:57:57.730ZGregg R Thomashttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/GreggRThomas
<p>Oh, I do so agree Heather.</p>
<p>Most people I'm afraid have never heard an actual string or horn or drum instrument, and most likely never ever will...they don't know what they are missing. :(</p>
<p>Oh, I do so agree Heather.</p>
<p>Most people I'm afraid have never heard an actual string or horn or drum instrument, and most likely never ever will...they don't know what they are missing. :(</p> Analog at very high fidelity…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-12:1982180:Comment:13086242013-05-12T03:52:52.601ZGregg R Thomashttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/GreggRThomas
<p>Analog at very high fidelity is more dynamic then Digital.</p>
<p>Analog is a curve, Digital is a series of points.</p>
<p>The human ear is limited, not everyone can detach the nuance of Analog over Digital.</p>
<p>Vinyl degrades with each playing, Digital is the same every time it's played.</p>
<p>Analog has a richness Digital can't match.</p>
<p>To be honest neither can compare with a quality orchestra in a concert hall.</p>
<p>Analog at very high fidelity is more dynamic then Digital.</p>
<p>Analog is a curve, Digital is a series of points.</p>
<p>The human ear is limited, not everyone can detach the nuance of Analog over Digital.</p>
<p>Vinyl degrades with each playing, Digital is the same every time it's played.</p>
<p>Analog has a richness Digital can't match.</p>
<p>To be honest neither can compare with a quality orchestra in a concert hall.</p> Today you rarely hear in inst…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-11:1982180:Comment:13082772013-05-11T14:41:45.960ZHeather Spoonheimhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/HeatherSpoonheim
<p>Today you rarely hear in instrument playing raw - so many have built in pick-ups, are run though effects processors, then clean-up processors, then equalizers on their way to the recording device that what the device records isn't true to the instrument at all.</p>
<p>I'm not at all skilled on my violin, but when I practice I hear a violin. There are so many people out there now playing electric 'violin' through so much processing that people seem to be forgetting what an actual violin…</p>
<p>Today you rarely hear in instrument playing raw - so many have built in pick-ups, are run though effects processors, then clean-up processors, then equalizers on their way to the recording device that what the device records isn't true to the instrument at all.</p>
<p>I'm not at all skilled on my violin, but when I practice I hear a violin. There are so many people out there now playing electric 'violin' through so much processing that people seem to be forgetting what an actual violin sounds like.</p> It's only a fallacy if it's f…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-11:1982180:Comment:13084012013-05-11T13:31:28.778ZUnseenhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/Unseen
<p>It's only a fallacy if it's fallacious and lacks any basis in fact or logic.</p>
<p>It's only a fallacy if it's fallacious and lacks any basis in fact or logic.</p> Given the wider dynamic range…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-11:1982180:Comment:13083992013-05-11T13:29:43.267ZUnseenhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/Unseen
<p>Given the wider dynamic range available in a good CD, apparently the enhanced experience involved in preferring vinyl comes from the lost range, which apparently makes vinyl seem warmer and less crisp. </p>
<p>BTW, as someone who's attended my share of live performances, they tend to be more crisp than warm. Thus a crisp-sounding recording may,indeed, be a more accurate reproduction.</p>
<p>Also, as I'm sure you're aware, recording techniques and technologies back in the 40's and 50's were…</p>
<p>Given the wider dynamic range available in a good CD, apparently the enhanced experience involved in preferring vinyl comes from the lost range, which apparently makes vinyl seem warmer and less crisp. </p>
<p>BTW, as someone who's attended my share of live performances, they tend to be more crisp than warm. Thus a crisp-sounding recording may,indeed, be a more accurate reproduction.</p>
<p>Also, as I'm sure you're aware, recording techniques and technologies back in the 40's and 50's were not as good as capturing dynamic range as today.</p> The other thing I miss with d…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2013-05-11:1982180:Comment:13082392013-05-11T04:36:16.346Z_Robert_http://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/RobertCampbell
<p>The other thing I miss with direct-to-digital is the subtle preview you get when the master analog tapes would sometimes sit around a bit to long and start to bleed to the adjacent revolution a bit and of course the subtle wow and flutter that was sometimes evident.</p>
<p>The other thing I miss with direct-to-digital is the subtle preview you get when the master analog tapes would sometimes sit around a bit to long and start to bleed to the adjacent revolution a bit and of course the subtle wow and flutter that was sometimes evident.</p>